Six Reasons Why Mormons Are Beating Baptists (In Church Growth)

[smac97]

This is interesting: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/frenchrevolution/2012/07/10/six-reasons-why-mormons-are-beating-baptists-in-church-growth/

Here are the opening paragraphs:

Our churches face a demographic crisis.

Young people are leaving, even the Southern Baptist Convention is starting to lose members, and when you drill down even deeper — comparing church attendance with population growth — the picture grows even more bleak. Simply put, when America’s fastest-growing religious segment is “nonreligious,” we have a problem. The Barna Group (the gold standard in evangelical research) recently compiled the results of a number of national studies and published a list of six reasons why young evangelicals leave the church: the church is overprotective, their experience of Christianity is shallow, churches seem antagonistic to science, the church’s approach to sexuality is judgmental and simplistic, they wrestle with the exclusivity of Christianity, and the church feels unfriendly to those who doubt.

...

But one of the top four churches not only shows consistent growth, but growth continues year by year and decade by decade. Mormons, living in the same country and culture that Baptists do, just keep growing their church. Why? I propose six reasons:

Here are the six reasons (go the article to read the author's explanation for these reasons:

1. Mormons have bigger families.

2. Mormons have lower divorce rates.

3. Mormons evangelize.

4. Mormons are orthodox (Ed: within their own faith tradition, that is).

5. Mormon leaders ask a lot of their members.

6. Mormons are less selfish.

This article was just barely posted, so not comments yet. I'll be interested to see what sort of comments it garners.

Meanwhile, what are your thoughts? Are the author's six reasons valid?

Thanks,

-Smac

[KevinG]

It is flattering in a way but I'm never comfortable with these types of comparisons - they invite enmity.

For every rule there is an exception... I know lots of Southern Evangelicals with families as large as mine. Averages probably lean towards Mormons.

Temple going Mormons have low divorce rates, the rest of us are about average. Church attending Baptists probably have a lower divorce rate than the general population.

Baptists evangelize. They also go on short and long term service missions.

Mormons are orthodox but so are devout protestants.

The last two points are hard to measure. Are we really less selfish or does our culture encourage the best of us?

[cinepro]

Those are interesting points, but I suspect the Church is trending away on many of them.

I hope I'm wrong, but I think if you chart family size, divorce rate, orthodoxy and selfishness (however you could define or measure it) over the last 50 years, things are getting "worse" for LDS.

But I think we still do a good job on "evangelizing" and "asking a lot of our members."

So maybe LDS could learn something from the article as well.

Edited July 10, 2012 by cinepro

[KevinG]

Speak for yourself I breed like a rabbit.

[SamIam]

Here are the six reasons (go the article to read the author's explanation for these reasons:

1. Mormons have bigger families.

2. Mormons have lower divorce rates.

3. Mormons evangelize.

4. Mormons are orthodox (Ed: within their own faith tradition, that is).

5. Mormon leaders ask a lot of their members.

6. Mormons are less selfish.

-Smac

While I have to agree that in many respects the members are slowly slipping to average, I think it is a more fundamental issue than the size of families, and divorce rates etc... As my wife and I walked last night we took an unscientific poll between us of the members in our current ward that have divorced in the past 13 years. In every single instance of memory of a dozen or so splits each one had a common denominator - a wife working outside the home. I know that in each instance there were specifics to the couple but I also know that in my own marriage sometimes the biggest thing going for us was we had to make it work. I couldn’t raise my family and care for the home without her and she could not get along financially without me.(abbreviated reasoning) Now I do not want to posit that as a single cause, but it speaks to a general laziness on the parts of the members to strictly adhere to the fundamental principles of the Gospel. The only time I have seen an non-working mother leave the home was when the wealth was sufficient that in the divorce the award would be adequate to provide for both. Something about having means of financial independence somehow works to undermine the willingness of the parties to give it all they have to keep it going.

If there were stats that were to measure the percentage of LDS that adhere to this one fundamental issue and stay married my guess is it would be overwhelmingly indicative of a significant percentage. Of the 50 % of members that do stay married I wouldn’t be surprised if 90% of that number are very diligent on this and other fundamental gospel principles.

Edited July 10, 2012 by SamIam

[rongo]

Those are interesting points, but I suspect the Church is trending away on many of them.

I hope I'm wrong, but I think if you chart family size, divorce rate, orthodoxy and selfishness (however you could define or measure it) over the last 50 years, things are getting "worse" for LDS.

In 2009, we had a bishops/stake presidencies meeting with Elder Perry and Elder Halstrom. One detailed response that came out in the Q&A was that the average American family size was 2.3 children per family. Among families where at least *one* parent had *served a mission*, the number jumps to 3.5. Where *neither* parent had served a mission, it fell to 1.7. Very interesting.

There was a lot more, but I have those notes on a different computer. I'll post them when I have time.

[Calm]

This would be very interesting, please do.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

This is interesting: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/frenchrevolution/2012/07/10/six-reasons-why-mormons-are-beating-baptists-in-church-growth/

Here are the opening paragraphs:

Here are the six reasons (go the article to read the author's explanation for these reasons:

1. Mormons have bigger families.

2. Mormons have lower divorce rates.

3. Mormons evangelize.

4. Mormons are orthodox (Ed: within their own faith tradition, that is).

5. Mormon leaders ask a lot of their members.

6. Mormons are less selfish.

This article was just barely posted, so not comments yet. I'll be interested to see what sort of comments it garners.

Meanwhile, what are your thoughts? Are the author's six reasons valid?

Thanks,

-Smac

I have been doing it with a big stick.

[DBMormon]

1. Mormons have bigger families.

2. Mormons have lower divorce rates.

3. Mormons evangelize.

4. Mormons are orthodox (Ed: within their own faith tradition, that is).

5. Mormon leaders ask a lot of their members.

6. Mormons are less selfish.

While I agree with each of these to some extent I think there are better reasons

1.) Evangelize - This one stays on my list. Thousands of Missionaries out serving full time at an age when most people would care less or at least not enough to spread the "good news"

2.) Ask a lot of their members - this one stays as well. To me this is the great secret of the church, that every member has responsibility - this has so many positive side effects. I think there is something to be said as well for how one feels in the church, when they feel valued and responsible to help build the kingdom. The church makes each of us feel important and gives great opportunites for growth

3.) a truth message - claiming to be the one and only true church ticks off a lot of people but I also believe it causes many to gravitate to it's message. If I didn't understand or believe in the ramifications of the "one true church" I would never have fought for my faith as hard as i have at difficult times. There is so much on the line with a church that is either the one or a fraud, it demands to be taken seriously... If I belonged to the universal church down the street, I would have left in the first challenge to my faith. Instead I scratched and clawed and fought knowing what was on the line

4.) emphasis on families - The church does a good job giving each family member purpose that the church becomes a rock each family member can lean on and feel blessing from

5.) Divine direction - What i mean by this is that mormons are aware of this grand potential the church has and believe they know where it is headed. Anytime we have a plan in place the results are better. Members believe the church has a divine destiny and this gives us purpose as we push ahead and want to be part of something grand. Don't we all want to be part of something bigger and better then what we are now. Believing member of the church gets that out of their faith system

6.) Feeling ostrasized by the world. When one feels his mesage is right and true and the world tells him he is crazy and wrong, one will holder tighter to his belief and fight for it and strive to prove others wrong. Like when you had the high school boyfriend/girlfriend who was not good for you, but the more people told you that the more you wanted to show the world they were wrong. Or when someone told you that you would fail at something so you doubled your effort to show them it could be done.

The more the world mocks us, the more we roll up our sleeves

Edited July 10, 2012 by DBMormon

[zerinus]

This is interesting: http://www.patheos.c...-church-growth/

Here are the opening paragraphs:

Here are the six reasons (go the article to read the author's explanation for these reasons:

1. Mormons have bigger families.

2. Mormons have lower divorce rates.

3. Mormons evangelize.

4. Mormons are orthodox (Ed: within their own faith tradition, that is).

5. Mormon leaders ask a lot of their members.

6. Mormons are less selfish.

This article was just barely posted, so not comments yet. I'll be interested to see what sort of comments it garners.

Meanwhile, what are your thoughts? Are the author's six reasons valid?

Thanks,

-Smac

Interesting article. I just posted the following message in reply to the article, which is "awaiting moderation:"

Hi, and thank you for your article. While your observations are certainly relevant and complementary to Mormons, I don’t believe they provide a complete explanation for the steady growth of Mormonism in the United States. As an observant Mormon, I think I can point to a more direct explanation—and that is the Book of Mormon itself. Almost everyone who becomes a Mormon, or joins the LDS Church, does so after reading the Book of Mormon and gaining a spiritual witness of its truth. Everything else falls into place once that witness is obtained. Without obtaining that spiritual witness, I think I can safely say that no one ever joins the LDS Church. But with that witness obtained, joining the Church becomes a foregone conclusion. Any attempt to try to explain the Mormon conversion rate that ignores or bypasses the role of the Book of Mormon will fail to provide the required explanation.

I hope that you all approve!

[cursor]

"My name is Curtis L. Sorenson ... and I approve this message."

Sorry, but I could simply NOT resist!

[Avatar4321]

Interesting article. I just posted the following message in reply to the article, which is "awaiting moderation:"

I hope that you all approve!

You make a really good point.

[cdowis]

In 2009, we had a bishops/stake presidencies meeting with Elder Perry and Elder Halstrom. One detailed response that came out in the Q&A was that the average American family size was 2.3 children per family. Among families where at least *one* parent had *served a mission*, the number jumps to 3.5. Where *neither* parent had served a mission, it fell to 1.7. Very interesting.

Hmmmm.... one of those statistics traps.

You have to control for the number of years as a member of the church, among other things. For example, many of those parents with no mission service may have joined the church later in life and childbearing was not a priority for them prior to joining the church.

One must be careful when looking at such statistics.

[CASteinman]

There is a certain way this article makes me sad.

The forces of "anti-God" and "no-God" are strong. Our Protestant and Catholic friends (and enemies) are suffering from this onslaught.

So are we.

The enemy is upon us. Wheat and Tares together sown.

It does not create joy in me to see people fall away from any belief in God (even a false belief) that might lead them to greater light. This falling away is harmful overall to society and makes our job of preparing the earth for the Return of the Lord Jesus Christ harder as well. In addition, the same infections that afflict the others also may affect the weaker members of the LDS Faith.

Overall, this is not so great -- even if we are doing "better" than they are. As flattering as that is, the overall article expresses a troubling issue that I have been concerned about for nearly a decade now.

[DBMormon]

There is a certain way this article makes me sad.

The forces of "anti-God" and "no-God" are strong. Our Protestant and Catholic friends (and enemies) are suffering from this onslaught.

So are we.

The enemy is upon us. Wheat and Tares together sown.

Amen Brother!!

[happy]

There is a guy named Victor who is a physicist who is so angry about the idea of God and an afterlife. He claims there is absolutely no evidence of either and that the ideas are simply absurd. Why do some of these people get so angry. It makes me feel if they have an agenda we should be concerned about.

[zerinus]

Interesting article. I just posted the following message in reply to the article, which is "awaiting moderation:"

I hope that you all approve!

I just noticed that my reply has passed moderation, and published in the reply section. I challenge everyone here to come up with a smarter reply than the one I have given!

[DBMormon]

I just noticed that my reply has passed moderation, and published in the reply section. I challenge everyone here to come up with a smarter reply than the one I have given!

Is that possible?

[zerinus]

Is that possible?

I doubt it!

[rongo]

Hmmmm.... one of those statistics traps.

You have to control for the number of years as a member of the church, among other things. For example, many of those parents with no mission service may have joined the church later in life and childbearing was not a priority for them prior to joining the church.

One must be careful when looking at such statistics.

Point well-taken, but I think you're overly-cautious about "controlling." Statsitically speaking, wouldn't these convert couples be more likely to mirror or approximate the national average, instead of falling far under it? I think that most couples here are nominally-active/barely active LDS couples, many of whom were children of record but fell "off-track" in the benchmarks along the way (e.g., baptism by the age of nine, AP ordination at the appropriate ages, etc.). Anyone with background knowledge of their own ward list can attest to how big *that* demographic is in the Church, as opposed to parents who joined the Church later in life after their childbearing years.

Here is the complete set of statistics Elder Perry gave in 2010. His larger point was just how vital missionary service is to the Church in ways other than converts and gaining leadership experience:

---500 parents of full-time missionaries were baptized in 2009 while their sons and daughters were on their missions.

---75% of stake presidents have served missions.

---67% of bishops have served missions.

---63% of elders quorum presidents have served missions. [i actually found these numbers to be lower than I thought they would be. I thought they would be higher.]

---95% of young men are ordained deacons by the time they are 13 if either the father or mother served a mission.

---Only 5% of people in the Church where neither the mother or father served a mission are married in the temple by the time they are 30.

---Average number of children for LDS couples where either the husband or the wife served a mission: 3.4.

--- Average number of children for LDS couples where neither the husband nor the wife served a mission: 1.5. [u.S. average: 2.3]

---64% of current missionaries had parents who served missions.

I have personally seen this last one. Many of my prospective missionaries are "first-generation" missionaries, and it is much harder to get them intrinsically motivated compared to children whose parents served missions, and who have been raised with their mission stories, pictures, and the overall effect of the missions.

[Damien the Leper]

In 2009, we had a bishops/stake presidencies meeting with Elder Perry and Elder Halstrom. One detailed response that came out in the Q&A was that the average American family size was 2.3 children per family. Among families where at least *one* parent had *served a mission*, the number jumps to 3.5. Where *neither* parent had served a mission, it fell to 1.7. Very interesting.

There was a lot more, but I have those notes on a different computer. I'll post them when I have time.

Bishop J.,

That's interesting.

I was wondering how the church would respond to the number of people who claim to be LDS compared to the number the Church has on record. Is there a huge difference in numbers?

I'm not trying to incite any anti or critic agenda but the subject is interesting.

[why me]

Bishop J.,

That's interesting.

I was wondering how the church would respond to the number of people who claim to be LDS compared to the number the Church has on record. Is there a huge difference in numbers?

I'm not trying to incite any anti or critic agenda but the subject is interesting.

I think that the pew study would be of help. But I can't find it on the web. But someone else with more skills can.

[why me]

Following critic sites, I often read how members are leaving the lds church in droves. I suppose that this is not true. However, if one repeats it enough, some members may be taken in and decide to leave themselves. It is called the bandwagon effect in advertizing. It is good to read an evangelical's positive blog on the lds. Our friend Shawn should read it.

[Calm]

---Only 5% of people in the Church where neither the mother or father served a mission are married in the temple by the time they are 30.

It would be interesting to see how this demographic changes with age. Neither of my parents served missions, it was relatively rare for young women to go of my mother's generation. It was not so expected for those of my father's generation to go either, especially due to WWII and the Korean War. His brother who was 10 years older went, he did not (though he was an Eagle Scout). So I would think people my age have a higher percentage of being married in the temple if neither parent went than perhaps the younger generations do when it became highly expected of young men to go and women started going young more commonly as well.

[Calm]

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-statement-on-2012-pew-study-on-mormons

http://www.pewforum.org/Christian/Mormon/mormons-in-america.aspx